"You should think up better advice."

This reading literally made me laugh out loud. I knew things were going to get good when, in the introduction under "Analysis and Summary of Arguments in Rhetoric Against Quintilian", Bizzell and Herzberg themselves describe his piece as a "damaging attack", and note the "arrogance" of his style with its "highly agonistic tone" (678). We see this emerge in Ramus' side comments about Quintilian, used to reinforce his point: "I probably could not be like him, even if I should wish so; but in fact if I could, I would not even wish so" (682, right column).  He also describes Quintilian's method of constructing an argument as "scrap[ing] together the most stupid trifles", and goes on to let him know that next time, "I expect better words than this, or you should think up better advice" (686, left column). A little entitled, are we? Although, with the freedom that comes with attack without fear of rebuttal, one can expect such superiority and condescension from Ramus' end. How else is he going to enact such widespread change about these authors without really causing a scene?

I wonder if the context of his work influenced the way he wrote. (Again, kairos catches my eye.) We learn that Ramus was a professor at the University of Paris, a "charismatic teacher who soon attracted a large following" (674). Writing to appeal to a crowd of young college students while attempting to be edgy and break free of traditional methods could certainly result in a cocky, argumentative tone. I found it easy to draw modern parallels; I think there is a universal sense of frustration with the old and outdated method of doing things. We grow and modernize, and huff with impatience at how ancient works of literature differ from our new ideas. However, I do wonder at the sheer anger of the entire piece. In contrast to the general apathy seen by the public about these classic authors (we may agree or disagree, but do so half-heartedly), Ramus retains an immense anger throughout Arguments in Rhetoric Against Quintilian. Is it more because of his passion in his own ideas, or his distaste for former ideals? Do his concerns lie in the past or the future? Perhaps it is both, but either way, it made for an entertaining and enlightening read.